Case law

Hutzler v. Richter

13 A.D. 592 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jan 15, 1897

Y. 133 ) as holding that collateral agreements are not included in the established rule excluding paroi evidence tending to vary, modify or extend a written contract, because they are separate, independent and complete contracts … Y. 413 ) is clearly distinguishable. In the last-mentioned case the court said it was ££ very near the line.” I am of the opinion that the judgment herein should be affirmed, with costs.

In re the Assignment of Whitney & Kitchen

146 A.D. 45 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jul 7, 1911

Peck, and on January •2.5, 1908, the members of . the firm made individual general assignments, .without preferehce, to the same person, who duly qualified as assignee under all three assignments on January 17, 1908, February … other as respects the distribution of the corresponding fund, could be prevented only by express and unmistakable directions to the contrary in the instrument of assignment, but that when the intention of the assignor was clearly

Cogan v. Taylor

212 A.D. 8 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Feb 6, 1925

His widow was appointed his administratrix and qualified as such. The foreclosure action referred to above was commenced in 1914. … Plaintiff appears to be correct in contending that, when established, the intention, that a man and wife are joint owners with survivorship of a mortgage made to them, prevails over the presumption that they are owners in

New Hampshire Insurance v. Clearwater Insurance

129 A.D.3d 99 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Mar 24, 2015

providing, generally obligates Clearwater to “follow the settlements” made by New Hampshire with its insured — a question that we need not, and do not, decide on this appeal — the cedent’s allocation decisions are not “immune … Co., 52 F3d 1194, 1206 [3d Cir 1995]), the “follow the settlements” doctrine “insulates a reinsured’s liability determinations from challenge by a reinsurer unless they are fraudulent, in bad faith, or the payments are clearly

Cooke v. Cooke

2 A.D.2d 128 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jul 2, 1956

This provision, however, is coupled with the qualifying proviso that the husband is privileged to reduce such monthly payments in the event his net income for any year be less than $10,000. … The agreement contains many other indications which, in the aggregate, clearly show that, if the husband predeceased appellant the payment of alimony was intended to continue during his life; whereas, if he survived her,

Benkard v. Leonard

231 A.D. 625 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Mar 6, 1931

Schirmer by a duly qualified court of the State of Nevada. Prior to and at the time of the execution of the said written agreement between Rudolph E. … It clearly appears from the quotations from said agreement last above made that upon the death of Rudolph E.

Bowron v. de Selding

105 A.D. 500 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jul 1, 1905

.: On the 20th of February, 1903, Ellen Josephine Banker died, leaving a last will and testament which was subsequently admitted to probate and letters testamentary issued to the plaintiffs, who qualified and entered upon … of the trial Court that the certificates of stock were never given to the defendant, and, indeed, a slight consideration of it demonstrates, as it seems to me, that had the finding been •the other way it would have been clearly

In re Estate of Schlesinger

36 A.D. 77 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jul 1, 1899

Schlesinger died in-May, 1869, and-in November of that year his will was duly admitted to probate by the surrogate of the county of New York, and letters testamentary thereon were issued to Lewis May and Julius Epstein, who qualified … Unless, therefore, something has happened, to prevent the running of the statute, this proceeding is clearly barred.

Katleski v. Cazenovia Golf Club, Inc.

2024 NY Slip Op 01366 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Mar 14, 2024

However, a participant in a qualified activity is not "deemed to have assumed risks that are concealed or unreasonably enhanced" ( Grady v Chenango Val. Cent. Sch. … The majority's contrary conclusion inappropriately fuses the two exceptions of the primary assumption of risk doctrine into one, effectively immunizing golf course owners from all liability for golf-ball injuries, regardless

Klein v. Murtagh

44 A.D.2d 465 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · May 20, 1974

S. 52 ), which held the granting of immunity by a State to a .witness in a State prosecution prohibited the Federal Government from using the witness’ testimony in a Federal prosecution. … Since the instant case clearly comes within paragraph (f), and since paragraph (f1) cannot be unconstitutional because it is beyond what the Supreme Court of the United States in BartJcus and Abbate {supra) has declared is

Long v. State

19 A.D.3d 554 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jun 20, 2005

The State cross-moved for summary judgment dismissing the claim arguing, inter alia, that the “vacatur and/or dismissal in the interests of justice [does] not qualify as an enumerated ground under [Court of Claims Act] § … In order to bring a claim under Court of Claims Act § 8-b, a claimant must establish, inter alia, that the “claim is not time-barred by the provisions of subdivision seven of this section” (Court of Claims Act § 8-b [3] [

O'Keeffe v. Mayor of New York

29 A.D. 524 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jul 1, 1898

Starting with the proposition, which was clearly established, that the ice had been rarely removed from this walk, it was made to appear by several witnesses that for a considerable time before the second of February the … Upon a careful examination of this case we are forced to the conclusion that the testimony presented by the plaintiff, if believed by the jury, clearly tended to establish negligence on the part of the municipal corporation

Acosta v. Loews Corp.

276 A.D.2d 214 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Nov 28, 2000

Thus, the ACD remains immune from judicial review, unless it clearly violates the law. … Employers may be held liable for tortious conduct by employees when the employer’s complicity can be established (cf., Loughry v Lincoln First Bank, 67 NY2d 369, 373 ).

People ex rel. Bennett v. Laman

250 A.D. 660 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Apr 28, 1937

In their complaint the plaintiffs allege that the defendant is neither qualified nor licensed to practice medicine in this State; that he fraudulently represents himself as a qualified practitioner of medicine, in violation … In other words, we have under review a complaint charging conduct that is clearly criminal, which calls for criminal prosecution, and with which the criminal courts are fully competent to deal.

Auer v. State

283 A.D.2d 122 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jun 28, 2001

Auth. ( 91 NY2d 76 ), held that similar statutes embodying the “shall not exceed” qualifying language permit a court, in its discretion, to impose a rate of interest lower than 9% (id., at 80). … Clearly, Melody should not be penalized for the fact that her guardian was precluded by the court from investing the money in the first instance due to its nonavailability.

People ex rel. Rochester Telephone Co. v. Priest

101 A.D. 223 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jan 15, 1905

They are' undoubtedly the best qualified' to defend those assessments as properly made at the full vallie. … How are they any more qualified to allege and prove such undervaluation than to make the,original assessment? A statute so interpreted would clearly be incongruous and.'inconsistent."

Price v. County of Erie

163 A.D. 437 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jul 7, 1914

.: The plaintiff, respondent, for twelve years, from January 1, 1901, to January 1, 1913, was the duly elected, qualified and acting county clerk of the county of Erie, and as such, during all of said period, served as clerk … The resolution adopted by the supervisors of Erie county clearly showed an intention to procure a judicial determination as to the ownership of such fees, and clearly manifested an intention to waive any claim thereto based

D'Avilar v. Cerebral Palsy Ass'n

63 A.D.3d 776 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jun 9, 2009

The plaintiff insisted that that position was the only position for which she was qualified. *777 The plaintiff subsequently commenced this action, alleging that the defendant discriminated against her in employment on the … The defendant established its prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law based on the plaintiffs application for SSDI benefits, in which the plaintiff averred that she could not perform the job of a direct care

Colon v. Bridge Plaza Rental Corp.

46 A.D.2d 13 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Nov 19, 1974

In such cases not only the facts, but the conclusions to which they lead, may be testified to by qualified experts ” (Dougherty v. Milliken, 163 N. Y. 527, 533 ). … Finally, it is observed that the trial court should not have rejected the testimony offered by defendant to establish custom and usage in this particular trade, namely, the repair of outages on the city’s highways.

People v. Wicks

11 A.D. 539 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jul 1, 1896

The evidence very clearly indicates that the appellant in effect assured Mrs. … He was cross-examined upon the subject, and to some extent qualified his evidence given in chief.